Originally posted by ravenshadow13
What I was going to say is about the statement "wouldn't they just tax is like liquor?"
1) Would there be an age minimum?
If there is in alcohol and tobacco and guns and driving and...well, yes there would be a betting chance of an age minimum.
2) How could they tax it unless the government was allowing it to be sold only in stores?
- This would be a huge problem. Everyone who currently grows it and sells it for profit (a HUGE amount of people, even just the people who sell it at
a higher price from the suppliers that they get it from included) would be, in essence, out of a job.
Um, if they were good at it, as many are, then they could become legal suppliers for stores or something and make even more money than they do now,
3) And for my general argument all the time- What would we do when employers make it prohibited in their employees but everyone is legally allowed to
smoke it? What would we do when all the depressed unemployed people start deciding to smoke pot because it makes them feel better? Would it help them
go out and get jobs?
a: Some businesses actually force employees to be tobacco free, and that is a legal drug (and I am sure that most employers don't want people coming
into work drunk). b: People, unemployed or not, will smoke it if they want to whether it is legal or not. Yes, I admit there are people that do not
smoke it only because it is illegal, but I doubt being stoned would be a convincing catalyst for normally sober people to get a job.
4) What about using it while driving? Or pregnant? Or in public?
All these things have been addressed with alcohol and tobacco laws, as well as surgeon general warnings and such.
What about secondhand highs (which happens, I hear... would you want it to be legal and then everyone smokes outside or in apartments and kids
start getting buzzed off of it?
Um, it's hard to take this fear seriously when it only takes a little common sense to resolve the issue. Do we see many children in bars? There are
occasionally irresponsible parents that take their kids to a bar. Sometimes you have to take your kid with you, but I think most parents would not
take a kid to a bar when they have a choice. But I digress... There would most certainly be cultural and legislative solutions to the situation.
Property owners would have the last say if there is no law to cover a given situation.
...I 100% support the use of the marijuana plant for medicinal use when prescribed by doctors, as well as for the development of new fuels and
for use in the textile industry.
I agree as well, but are you implying that any other use would be "wrong"?
I would assume you aren't, as you go on to say:
For all of those cases, there would be companies growing it. Companies would need to grow it, because otherwise it would become laced with
illicit drugs. The FDA would need to monitor it...
I get teary-eyed from laughter when I hear people say that there is a danger of marijuana getting "laced" with other drugs. For the most part, and I
mean more than 99% of the time, weed is weed. It may be weaker or stronger or a different strain or color or genetic crossover, but unless a user is
"lacing" his own stash, it just isn't logical or economical to do such a thing before selling it. And anyone with any experience knows that.
So anyone who thinks that it would stay the same price, be sold by whoever, for anyone to use, and not be under very close scrutiny by their
employers as well as the government to make sure that it is "healthy" and taxed... you're seriously living in dreamland.
I totally agree. Freedom + Responsibility = The Original American Dream.